5 comments Writer For Fansided Has the Hottest of Hot Michael Jordan Takes

Bleacher Report has sort of cleaned up it's act and gotten away from the amateur writers who provided the really shitty content on the site and hired real sportswriters for the site. It's sad, but happy. Sad, because I need those shitty writers for this site, but happy because that means there is less bad journalism in the world. Well, that's bad for this site too. Dammit! Fortunately, there are still sites like Fansided with micro-sites run by morons. I shouldn't be mean, but fuck it, many of these micro-sites do seem like they are run by morons.

Hat tip to the emailer who sent this article to me. It is truly one of the hottest of hot takes about what an asshole Michael Jordan is. This micro-site is called Sir Charles in Charge, while the author's name is Mark. Okay. What's nice is Mark has a warning up on the micro-site so that anyone who reads his columns isn't in shock from what he/she/it is reading:

Mark is not your typical NBA fan or writer. While some may look the other way when their favorite team or player has a bad game Mark will usually attack that story and go against the grain. 

Because NOBODY gives hot takes and reactionary points of view about a player's bad game. If I had to make a list of those who have the guts to do this then the list would only include Mark, most of the ESPN staff paid to give a opinion, everyone on talk radio whether it is a host or caller, anyone in the comment section on a sports article, and professional sportswriters. It's some elite company Mark finds himself in. LeBron didn't have a good few games in a row? Mark is going to attack the fuck out of that story and point out that LeBron is a piece of shit. Can't handle it? Mark (or Charles) is in charge, so get the hell out of here.

This is what he finds fun about writing, giving fans the honest truth even if they wish not to hear it.

He gives the very truth AT THAT VERY MINUTE to fans, even if they don't like it. "Like it" being defined as "Aren't partial to hot takes based on a player having one bad game and these hot takes only serve the sole purpose of helping the person giving the hot take to gain attention."

Speaking of attention, here is his article about how Michael Jordan is the most disrespectful and overrated man in NBA history. That doesn't seem like an extreme or non-factual statement at all. Is it possible this conclusion is not based on facts and instead is simply a reflection of the author's biased opinion? The answer, is that it could not be possible. Try to disprove how disrespectful and overrated Michael Jordan is. You can't, because Mark is spitting the truth and you just don't want to hear it. It's not that he's wrong, you just can't handle the truth.

Just because Michael Jordan is viewed as the Greatest of All Time doesn’t mean he deserves the respect of everyone — certainly not mine

Well then. I wish I didn't hear this, but someone had to tell me.  

Michael Jordan may be the greatest in many eyes, “The GOAT,  Money,  ICON” or whatever other name he is called these days, but I never saw him as much more than a product of great marketing. 

This could be because you are stupid and confuse "Michael Jordan the basketball player" with "Michael Jordan the business man." There are a lot of athletes who receive chances to market products and they receive these opportunities because they are good at a sports. The fact an athlete has a lot of endorsements and is well-marketed doesn't mean that athlete is a product of marketing. It's especially hilarious that Michael Jordan is being criticized as a product of great marketing, especially considering those six NBA titles and all of the NBA records he holds speak for themselves with zero marketing required. 

Could he play the game? 

Uh-oh. I hope the answer to this isn't another thing I don't want to hear. 

Yes, he was a bad dude on the court and accomplished many wonderful things

Product of marketing. That's all.  

but the majority of those plays were being done by half of the league back then, he was just the one they decided to immortalize in commercials.

Wow, I seem to only recall one NBA player switching hands on a layup during the 1991 NBA Finals, but I'm sure I missed it. The NBA probably erased my memory and removed all evidence of other players doing this. I also don't remember too many players starting from the foul line and dunking the basketball, but I'm sure Jon Koncak and Cliff Livington were doing this type of thing all the time while Uwe Blab waited his turn to show off his dunking skills. I must have missed Alvin Robertson putting on a dunk clinic from the foul line or winning a dunk contest. I blame the vast conspiracy to prop up Michael Jordan that makes me forget that Jordan was just one of hundreds of players doing the things he did. I didn't realize half the league was scoring 30 points per game either. I wonder if these players noticed when they scored a basket their team didn't get credit for the points? What a conspiracy to market a single individual.

Have you ever seen Clyde “The Glide” Drexler play? 

No, only you have seen Clyde Drexler play because he has been edited out of NBA history forever in order to further the myth of Michael Jordan. 

If you have, then you would know of the great plays he made throughout his career as well, but rarely do you see him in any NBA spots for advertising.

Part of the reason is he wasn't exactly a natural in front of a camera in local ads.

Not to mention, you don't see Drexler in any NBA spots for advertising because he's been retired for almost two decades now. You don't see Michael Jordan in any NBA advertisements anymore either. The only reason Jordan is still relevant in the NBA is because he owns an NBA team. Like he owns the team and so that sort of still gives him some connection to the NBA today. It's hilarious this writer (and I'm being kind in calling him that) is using Clyde Drexler has a comparison to Jordan, because Drexler has been recognized for his talents. He was on the Dream Team and he is in the Pro Basketball Hall of Fame. It's not like he's getting the short end of the stick when comparing his achievements to Michael Jordan's achievements. Drexler has one NBA title. Jordan has six NBA titles. Who cares which player was in the NBA ads? Jordan was a better player than Drexler and probably had a better agent (David Falk) than Clyde Drexler. But if you insist on pushing the point, here is Drexler in the signature NBA ads of the 80's. This is awkward now. 

Jordan shoes were being sold to the public for $100+ and for the kids that couldn’t afford them they were out robbing the kids that could.

Okay, well then. Now that you bring it up, Michael Jordan probably is responsible for kids robbing kids so they could have his shoes. What's weird is I have heard this argument before. I just don't know where. 

At some point make a statement to the public to stop the nonsense, drop the prices of your shoes to make them affordable, the same way that Stephon Marbury and Chris Webber did.

Now I know where I heard this argument. From Stephon Marbury. So basically the author is stealing talking points from Stephon Marbury in an effort to show how overrated Michael Jordan is and how he is a jerk.

But again, the author is stealing talking points from Chris Webber. Webber wanted more reasonably priced shoes, so his Fila shoes sold for $85 to $90, which is more reasonable than how much Jordan's shoes costs, but also not exactly cheap. The only examples of cheap shoes the author could come up with were shoes from Chris Webber and Stephon Marbury. I had to double check to make sure this article wasn't written in 1999.
 
Through all the ball-hogging, push-offs and crying when someone dared to touch him, 

It's like this article was not just written in 1999, but written in 1989. These are many of the same criticisms people had of Jordan back then. By the way, Jordan is 42nd all-time in career assists and he averaged 5.3 assists per game during his career, while Clyde Drexler averaged 5.6 assists per game. Maybe Jordan ball-hogged in a way where he got his teammates involved nearly as much as Clyde Drexler did. 

I still admired his game until the NBA decided it was time to win the gold medal, that’s when my hate for Jordan really became apparent.

This is when the author's hate for Jordan became apparent...to himself? The 1992 Olympics is when the author became fully self-aware.

He was the face of the NBA 

But only because the other players were edited out of commercials and erased from the memory of those watching the games. 

but it wasn’t going to be a “Dream Team” without him and he used that power to his advantage. Before the team ever assembled there was a power struggle going on between the Chicago Bulls and the Detroit Pistons, mainly between Jordan and Isiah Thomas.

The struggle on the court was mainly between Jordan and the entire Pistons team. The Pistons had the "Jordan Rules" where they essentially beat the shit out of him if he got near to the rim with the basketball. 

The Pistons treated the Bulls with as much respect that an alcoholic step-father treats his step-children.

The alcoholic step-father, who became an alcoholic from years spent trying to convince everyone of Clyde Drexler's greatness, treats his children terribly by robbing them and stealing their Air Jordan shoes. If they were Marbury or Webber shoes, it wouldn't come to this, but because Air Jordan shoes are so expensive, sometimes a child just has to get robbed. 

Jordan’s hate for Detroit was evident on the court, but behind closed doors he was plotting. When the call came to construct the Dream Team he saw his chance to put his power to use. He wasn’t going to play if a certain player was on the team.

Let's see, I hated the Pistons and I hated Michael Jordan. The Dream Team was winning the Gold medal no matter if Isiah Thomas or Marlo Thomas (just to stick with the 80's theme of this article) was the point guard. Yep, I don't really care what Jordan did or didn't do to keep Thomas off the team.

The author also conveniently leaves out that Isiah Thomas started the whole beef back in 1985 by freezing Michael Jordan out in the All-Star Game, but any evidence that may not make Jordan seem like the jerk the author believes him to be should be omitted. So the author complains the NBA made Michael Jordan into a product of marketing while claiming they were ignoring other NBA stars (which is absolutely false) in their marketing for the league, but in this column he only uses information that makes Jordan look bad in his treatment of Isiah Thomas while ignoring any culpability of Thomas in Jordan's behavior towards him.

At the time, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas and John Stockton were the best PG’s in the NBA.

And two of them were on the Dream Team. Only 12 players could make the team. There are five positions on an NBA team and 12 spots on the Dream Team roster. There can't be three players at every position on the roster, so Thomas didn't make the team because Jordan (and a couple others) could play point guard if they absolutely needed him to. 

Even Jordan, with his childish ways, knew that, but because of the disrespect he felt the Pistons gave him over the years and with them walking off the court when they finally beat the “Bad Boys,” Jordan was going to make sure Thomas would never play for the gold.

So Jordan wouldn't play if Thomas was on the team because Thomas froze him out of an exhibition game and then Thomas acted like a fucking baby and wouldn't shake hands after the Bulls finally beat the Pistons in the Eastern Conference Finals? Jordan is the bad guy though? I don't like Michael Jordan, but it seems Thomas had some karma coming back to him for the bitch move of walking his team off the court in the Eastern Conference Finals. Maybe Thomas shouldn't piss off the best player in the NBA.

If Thomas played on the team, Jordan would not and the league was too busy making money off his brand that they could not afford to let that happen, so what did they do? The same thing they always done, they kissed his butt, gave him another pacifier and let him have his way.

So let me get this straight. The NBA was so busy making money off the 1992 Olympics they couldn't afford to have Michael Jordan not participate as part of the squad? It's hard to speculate accurately, but did the NBA have a reason to want Michael Jordan on the 1992 Dream Team instead of Isiah Thomas? I don't know, but I do know there were a lot of really good players left off the team. James Worthy didn't make the team either.

Despite this author's attempts to pin Thomas not being on the Dream Team solely on Michael Jordan, there were plenty of other players who may not have participated had Thomas joined the team. So losing Jordan probably wasn't ideal, but losing Barkley, Pippen, Bird and Jordan? That's enough to keep the third-best point guard in the NBA off the team. Tough choices had to be made anyway, so why choose a player who was on the border of not making the team AND there were plenty of guys on the team who didn't like him?

But in came Chuck Daly to head the Dream Team, one of the greatest coaches in history and also the coach of said Pistons and Thomas. That’s how you know this was all personal between Jordan and Thomas.

Why play for the coach and not with the player?

I don't think it's a question of whether Michael Jordan liked Isiah Thomas or not. He didn't. The fact Jordan didn't like Thomas doesn't mean that Jordan alone had Thomas kept off the Olympic team and that's why he's overrated and a jerk. 

Like I said, I respect what he accomplished on the court, but what he did to Thomas always rubbed me the wrong way. Imagine if LeBron did the same to Kevin Durant or Kobe Bryant — he would get crucified, but since it was Jordan it’s like it gets swept under the rug.

Yes, it gets swept under the rug in that 23 years later it is still talked about. If anything, the idea Jordan kept Thomas off the Dream Team has been discussed too much over the past 23 years. It's part of the lore of Michael Jordan and how competitive he was. If the author thinks Jordan allegedly keeping Thomas off the Dream Team has been swept under the rug then he hasn't been paying attention. 

He took his position of power within the NBA and took away a once in a lifetime chance for one of the games greats.

The numbers situation took away a lifetime chance for one of the games greats. That's what happened. I would love to hear from the author on which player (outside of Laettner, because one college player was making the team) that he would have left off. Who would it have been? The 11th person to make the team after the first 10 players was named was...get ready for it...Clyde Drexler. So should the guy who the author thinks was just as good at basketball as Jordan have been removed from the Dream Team? If not, who should have not made the team? There were only two centers who made the team, so one of those can't be removed. Pippen or Chris Mullin? That leaves the team short in terms of small forwards, and especially since Pippen could also play point guard, he had added value. The bottom line is there wasn't room for Thomas even if players other than Jordan didn't like him. 

I have mixed feelings about Daly as well.

Well, that's good to know. 

Thomas was your player and you agreed to go on without him. Tell Jordan to suck it up and be a man about the situation.

This would have been awkward for Chuck Daly to say considering he didn't pick the players that made the Dream Team. I'm sure Daly could have worked hard to get Thomas on the team, but he probably knew that would make his job a lot harder than it needed to be. Why fight so hard to bring on a guy that many of the players don't like anyway, a guy who is the third-best point guard on the roster? 

What about his Hall Of Fame speech? To some it was funny and entertaining but the reality of it was he took another opportunity and the spotlight of many others to stand on his mighty soapbox and show his true colors.

That's Michael Jordan. It's who he is. 

Wow, talk about a guy with a serious hero complex. He was still taking shots at guys for no reason. Still taking shots at Magic Johnson and George Gervin for freezing him out in the 1985 NBA All Star game, he flew the player he was passed over for in high school simply to rub it in his face.

How can we forget the classic line the “organization didn’t play with the flu in Utah” — oh wow, some balls on this guy.

Yes, wow, some balls on this guy. Jordan almost as much balls as it takes to claim in an article that Jordan was just the product of great marketing. And that link about Johnson and Gervin freezing out Jordan in the 1985 All Star Game is actually an article about Isiah Thomas freezing Jordan out. The author clearly wants to mislead his readers and pretend it wasn't Thomas who was behind Jordan being frozen out. If anyone is trying to sweep the truth under the rug, it's the author trying to sweep the truth of Thomas and his involvement in the Jordan freeze out under the rug.

There is a reason why Charles Barkley and Jordan have remained so close throughout the years while he and Pippen have not. Pippen was the flunky, while Chuck would easily tell Jordan about himself.

A person like Jordan needs that one to put him in his place (Derek Fisher and Bryant) and he respects that about Barkley. When everyone is kissing your backside you need someone to slap you in the face every once in a while.

So because Jordan wants someone to slap him in the fact and stop kissing his ass, he tried hard to get a player who probably at some point actually slapped him in the face and wouldn't kiss his ass left off the 1992 Dream Team? If you don't use logic at all, then this might make sense. Unfortunately, the idea Jordan respects people who don't kiss his ass, but conspired to have an NBA player who didn't kiss his ass left off the Dream Team doesn't square.

Respect is earned and as fast as you get it, it can be taken away. To many, Michael Jordan is untouchable, they can’t see why someone could not like they guy.

This article isn't about liking or not liking Jordan. It says that Michael Jordan is the most overrated NBA player. Please argue the point you are trying make in an effort to prove your claim. Don't move the goalposts or try to make it seem like you didn't call Jordan overrated and that's the same thing as simply not liking Jordan.

You like who you like, simple as that.

I just didn’t — or don’t — respect Michael Jordan.

You don't have to respect Michael Jordan. Even a stupid person knows not respecting someone doesn't mean that player is the most overrated person in NBA history. Don't be stupid and stop with the hot takes. I'm going to write something that you may not want to hear. Your writing is not good at all. This is an embarrassment on so many levels.

4 comments Drew Sharp Says LeBron Didn't Take the Easy Path to the NBA Finals Because the 1992 Dream Team Exists

There isn't necessarily an "easy" path to an NBA Title. There are certainly paths that are easier than others. If Kevin Garnett had demanded a trade to the New York Knicks instead of agreeing to a trade to the Boston Celtics in 2007 then that certainly would not have been an easier path to an NBA Title than joining the Celtics ended up being for Garnett. So theoretically you could accuse him of taking the easy path to an NBA Title. It's all relative though. LeBron James didn't take the "easy" path to an NBA Title, but he certainly laid the groundwork to improve his chances of achieving an NBA Title by joining Wade and Bosh on the Miami Heat team. Drew Sharp says LeBron James didn't take the easy path because of the 1992 Dream Team and how it was put together by USA Basketball for the purposes of dominating national competition. It doesn't really make sense to me either.

The most ridiculous complaint among the chronic LeBron James whiners is that he took "the easy way" to serious NBA championship contention.

So was LeBron's previous NBA Finals appearance with the Cavs not serious NBA championship contention? Perhaps LeBron and the Cavs appearance in the Eastern Conference Finals in 2008-2009 doesn't count as serious NBA championship contention either.

This has been "easy"?

"Easy" isn't the best word for it necessarily. The Miami Heat have made two NBA Finals in the first two seasons LeBron has played for them. It hasn't been easy, mostly due to the difficulty with fitting LeBron/Wade/Bosh together and the public hatred towards "The Decision," but success has certainly happened for LeBron upon joining the Heat. So LeBron's path to an NBA Title over the past two years has been easier than other player's path to an NBA Title. Two NBA Finals in two years tells me LeBron's intentions to join the Heat in order to win an NBA title is probably going to work.

James doesn't merit much sympathy or compassion because he willingly placed a bulls-eye on himself, first crowning himself king before he even won a ring and then masterminding the assemblage of a proposed super team on South Beach.

I always love it when a writer acknowledges the opposing viewpoint and doesn't do anything to discredit this view. Part of a successful persuasive writing paper is discrediting or disproving the other viewpoint in order to show why your point of view is correct. Drew Sharp acknowledges the opposing viewpoint, but doesn't disprove or discredit it, then says something like, "Sure LeBron James shouldn't get any sympathy for his current situation because he put himself in that situation." He then proceeds to write the rest of the column explaining why LeBron is being overly-criticized and this should not be be happening, even though he acknowledges LeBron brought a lot of this criticism upon himself.

But the volume of animosity directed at him and the Miami Heat for their hubris reeks of hypocrisy.

I'm guessing Drew Sharp was on his couch Sunday night eating Cheez-Its and flipping between the Tony Awards and a Bravo reality television show when he suddenly remembered the 1992 Dream Team special was coming on the NBA Network this Wednesday. Suddenly a light bulb went off in his head and Drew Sharp thought, "Everyone who is criticizing LeBron for putting together a great team are hypocrites for cheering for the 1992 Dream Team." Then without even closing his box of Cheez-Its or giving this theory a further thought, Drew Sharp began writing this column as the sweet voice of Neil Patrick Harris entertaining the audience with antics and show tunes played in the background.

I suppose those same people who cry that the Heat violated some code of competitive ethics by amassing as many excellent basketball players as possible and unabashedly boasting about it will greet the 20th anniversary of the original Olympic Dream Team this summer with equal disdain.

Absolutely not. These are not comparable teams. The 1992 Dream Team was assembled for the Olympics. Any time there is an Olympic team formed by a country it (usually) features the best players from that sport. So by any measure of calculation, any hockey, baseball, basketball or soccer team will be a combination of the best players in that sport from a certain country. FIBA opened the Olympics up to professional basketball players in 1989. Every country could now use professional players and as a result the best team of all-time was formed. The members of the Dream Team had no choice to join another Olympic team. I don't believe any of the players on the Dream Team had duel citizenship, so therefore they had to play for Team USA if they wanted to play in the 1992 Olympic games. LeBron had a choice in deciding which NBA team to join.

Essentially what I am saying is the Heat and the 1992 Summer Olympics Basketball team are not comparable. Both teams had different goals and both teams were assembled for completely different reasons. By definition, an Olympic team will be the very best players in a given sport from a country...at least this team will contain the very best players who want to play in the Olympics. This definition isn't true for an NBA team. If John Stockton wanted to play in the 1992 Olympic games, he had to play for Team USA. LeBron, Bosh and Wade had options about which team to play for when they became free agents.

After all, the concept of the "super team" and the bravado it wrought was born during the 1992 Barcelona Games.

So the idea of combining Bosh/Wade/James was born in 1992 with the Dream Team? In actuality this idea was born during the 2008 Olympics or probably well before that. Every other country could use professional players as well, so it isn't like the United States was cheating. FIBA essentially gave permission for the United States and USA Basketball to use NBA stars. There was no bravado involved, unless Drew Sharp considers national pride to be bravado.

The NBA descendants of Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson and Karl Malone are only following their lead.

Of course, not ironically Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson and Karl Malone played for the same team for the vast majority of their NBA careers. Malone didn't leave Utah to chase a ring until he was past his prime and both Jordan and Johnson retired and then came back to the exact same team they played for previously. Compare that to LeBron James and him specifically signing a contract with the Heat that would allow him to be a free agent at the same time Wade and Bosh are. I just thought this was an interesting point to bring up.

Now, that was taking "the easy way" 20 years ago.

No, that was obeying the new rules FIBA had set out. Sure, USA Basketball could have not allowed professionals to play, but the 1992 Dream Team roster wanted to play. Because they wanted to play, and could play according to FIBA, they had to join Team USA.

USA Basketball opted against the long-standing conventional approach of taking the nation's best college players because it had grown outdated and less reliable against gradually improving foreign professional players.

This is a lie. USA Basketball opted against taking the nation's best college players because FIBA changed the rules and other countries would be including professional players on the roster...plus the NBA players wanted to join the Olympic team. What Drew Sharp intentionally leaves out is using college players had become outdated simply because professionals could now participate. This concept wasn't outdated only because the United States didn't win the gold medal in men's basketball in 1988. The concept was outdated because the rules were changed.

USA Basketball needed an alternative for accelerating America's return to uncontested world basketball dominance.

Hmmm, that strategy sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Not really. Other than good players joining up on the same team, I fail to see a tight connection between the Heat and the 1992 Dream Team. I could see the connection if members of the Dream Team who had duel citizenship had chosen to have a press conference and the reveal which country they would play for. I would see a good connection in that case, but that didn't happen. Professionals could play in the Olympics and Bird/Jordan/Magic had no choice but to join the American team if they wanted to play in the 1992 Olympics.

It spawned higher than normal Olympic TV ratings even though the games generally lacked any compelling drama.

The same is true with LeBron and the Heat.

What? The Heat playoff games lack any compelling drama? This is so far removed from the truth it becomes obvious Drew Sharp has no interest in approaching this subject honestly.

Had they lost Game 7 on Saturday night, the NBA season would've officially concluded before the NBA Finals. Nobody would've cared about a Boston-Oklahoma City championship series because of the all-consuming level of emotional involvement with the Heat,

Yes, "nobody" would have cared about a Boston-Oklahoma City NBA Finals. ESPN hardly pays attention to teams from Boston and God knows Kevin Durant isn't one of the three best basketball players on the planet. I'm sure there wouldn't have been storylines for this series about the young Thunder taking on the old Celtics or any discussion about two of the best point guards in the NBA squaring off against each other. "Nobody" would have watched this series.

Anything that involves him immediately attracts our attention and in most cases, our ire.

I'm pretty sure this entire column is directed at Skip Bayless.

When James walked off the floor after Orlando eliminated Cleveland from the playoffs in 2009 without shaking Dwight Howard's hand, it turned into a national firestorm for several days. He became the Spoiled One. Where's the outrage today over Kevin Garnett and Rajon Rondo blowing off the postgame congratulations Saturday night after the two finest consecutive playoff performances James ever delivered?

This is a valid point. My answer would be that we expect Rondo and Garnett to be dicks about losing. So the expectation for good sportsmanship from one/both of these players is a little bit lower compared to the expectations for James. It is true that James means ratings, but simply because James means ratings doesn't mean a Celtics-Thunder series would not have drawn ratings.

The Thunder's Kevin Durant stands at the threshold of becoming the most popular player in the NBA.

Which is another reason why ratings for a Thunder-Celtics NBA Finals would still have been very high.

Not because he could win his first NBA title, but rather because he would step over another LeBron Finals corpse to get to it.

The media, and yes that is who I am blaming for this issue yet again, has created the narrative that Kevin Durant loves his mom, loves video games, doesn't want to be a huge star, doesn't have tattoos (which is not true), and is just an All-American boy who has no ego. The media has created the narrative that LeBron James loves his mom but still lets his teammates have sex with her, travels with an entourage everywhere he goes (which is true), craves to be the king of all things basketball and non-basketball, and is the perfect example of the modern ego-driven and spoiled star. Durant made a quiet deal about signing an extension with the Thunder and James made a big deal about signing with the Heat and leaving Cleveland. The narrative created by the media is wrapped around these perceptions and facts.

The personal hate for the guy is downright childish.

Don't blame us. Blame the 1992 Dream Team. They created this mess.

I'll couch this by adding "as far as we know," there have been no public episodes of belligerence involving LeBron. No obsessions with porn stars and diner waitresses. No nightclub soirees with a loaded, unlocked automatic pistol slipping out of his underwear. No DUIs. No drug busts. He got engaged to the mother of his children.

Again, Drew Sharp goes the "he's such a nice guy" route like Rick Reilly did. This is irrelevant to quite a few people. The issue many people seem to have with LeBron is related to "The Decision" and his performance on the court. Guys like Reilly and Sharp try to cloud the main issue people have with LeBron by pointing out what a nice guy he seems to be.

But he's evil because he's somehow taken the easy path.

No, people consider him evil because the way they think he took the easy path and what was perceived as general disregard for the Cleveland Cavaliers franchise.

At least now we know where he got that from.

Yep, he got it from the 1992 Olympic Men's Basketball team. They took the easy way out by playing for Team USA in those Olympics. I would like to know what the hard way would have been for the members of the 1992 Dream Team that wanted to play in the Olympics? None of the players had duel citizenship, so they couldn't have played for any other country. So the members of the Dream Team had the choice of playing for Team USA or not playing at all. NBA players were allowed to play in the Olympics so if the members of that 1992 Dream Team wanted to play in the Olympics they had to play for Team USA. They didn't take the easy path to a gold medal, they took the only path available to them.

4 comments Trolling Leads to Comparing 2012 and 1992 Dream Teams

Chris Palmer, who is a person I had never heard of before I started writing this post, made the following statement on Twitter recently:

"Respect to the Dream Team. But Kobe, LeBron, Durant, Wade, Howard, CP3, Westbrook, Rondo would run them off the floor."

You can read all of his comments here. That's his Twitter account. Apparently Chris Palmer writes for ESPNLosAngeles and is an authentic ESPN NBA Insider, which is a title that apparently requires capitalization. This statement got me to thinking. Would the 1992 Dream Team be run off the floor by the 2012 Olympic team? Obviously it is nearly impossible to accurately compare these two teams, and I am sure someone somewhere has done a better job than I have in comparing these two teams (I'm guessing Bill Simmons will shit a comparison out soon since he writes 1-2 times per week and is out of column ideas to the point he is turning his weekly column into a Christmas card updating us all on his family's exploits), but I thought I would at least think this question out in long form using Palmer's Tweets.

First, we need to get the roster for each team. We know the roster for the 1992 Dream Team and I will guess at the roster for the 2012 Olympic Team, assuming the best American NBA players will play. I'm leaving off guys who I don't think would play (Rose/Duncan) or players I don't think would make the team (Garnett). So here are the rosters with the position they play, along with their age in each respective year when the Olympic games (1992 and 2012) occurred. By the way, I am not including Derrick Rose on this list because he would not play in these Olympics due to this knee injury. This isn't a list of the best players of the era and I am trying to be realistic on who would/could play for Team USA in the 2012 Olympics, so much like Isiah Thomas didn't make the Dream Team because everyone hated him, Rose wouldn't be on the 2012 Olympic team because he is injured.

1992 Dream Team

PG- Magic Johnson (33 years old)
PG- John Stockton (30 years old)
SG- Michael Jordan (29 years old)
SG- Clyde Drexler (30 years old)
SF- Larry Bird (35 years old)
SF- Chris Mullin (29 years old)
SF- Scottie Pippen (26 years old)
PF- Charles Barkley (29 years old)
PF- Karl Malone (29 years old)
PF- Christian Laettner (23 years old)
C- Patrick Ewing (30 years old)
C- David Robinson (27 years old)

2012 Olympic Team

PG- Chris Paul (27 years old)
PG- Russell Westbrook (23 years old)
PG- Rajon Rondo (26 years old)
SG- Dwayne Wade (30 years old)
SG- Kobe Bryant (34 years old)
SF- LeBron James (27 years old)
SF- Kevin Durant (23 years old)
SF- Carmelo Anthony (28 years old)
PF- Blake Griffin (23 years old)----as pointed out in the comments Kevin Love should have this spot. I was wrong to put Griffin here. It doesn't change opinion of this hypothetical game, but Love is a natural international player. Big mistake on my part.
PF- Chris Bosh (28 years old)
PF- LaMarcus Aldridge (27 years old)
C- Dwight Howard (26 years old)

So there we go. I left off Andrew Bynum, Kevin Love, Deron Williams, and Paul Pierce because I didn't think they would make the team.

Because it is hard to directly compare each team considering they played 20 years apart, I'm going to compare these two teams in the context of Chris Palmer's Tweets about the subject. He next Tweeted,

The speed alone would overwhelm the 30-something Dream Team.

He does have a point in that the 1992 Dream Team was older than the 2012 Olympic Team. The average age of the 1992 Dream Team was 29.2 years of age. and the average age of the 2012 Olympic team would be 26.8 years of age. I get what Palmer is saying about the speed of the 2012 team, but in their time Bird, Mullin, Ewing, and Stockton weren't considered to be fast players, but this still didn't stop them from dominating. This is a fast 2012 team, but the lack of speed didn't hurt members of the 1992 team when they played in the NBA. So I can feel comfortable giving the 2012 team an advantage in speed, but I don't know if this is such an advantage it means the 2012 team would dominate the 1992 team.

Dream Team had lots of subpar defenders: Mullin, Bird (back), Drexler, Laettner.

This is a fairly valid point. The Dream Team also had Ewing, Robinson, Pippen, Jordan, and Stockton (who cheated and grabbed so much it slowed the opposing point guard down). They were pretty good defenders in their own right. Besides, it isn't like the 2012 team is a defensive juggernaut with Anthony and Griffin on the roster. I'm not sure Westbrook, Rondo, or Paul could necessarily guard a much bigger Magic Johnson on the offensive end. Magic definitely wasn't in his prime, but I still think it wouldn't be an easy matchup for the 2012 point guards.

Not to mention, how did Clyde Drexler appear on Palmer's list as a sub-par defender? He is 7th on the all-time steals list. It certainly seems like he was capable of stealing the ball if he wasn't an excellent on-ball defender. I think the 1992 Dream Team as more defensively capable than Palmer gives them credit for being.

Defensive core of Kobe, LeBron, Wade is simply the best ever.

I can see that argument, but Jordan, Pippen, and Ewing are a pretty good defensive core too. You have to remember in this contest, 2012 Kobe is older than 1992 Jordan, 2012 LeBron is older than 1992 Pippen, and 2012 Wade is the same age as 1992 Ewing. Not that these players would be matched up against each directly, obviously, but the 1992 team's defensive core is actually younger than the 2012 team's defensive core.

Dream Team quality bigs Ewing, Robinson neutralized because of tempo.

Clearly Chris Palmer never saw David Robinson play basketball. Robinson was comfortable with a fast tempo and you only have to go to YouTube to see video of David Robinson running the break with his Spurs teammates. So while Ewing would guard Howard, when the 2012 team went up-tempo the 1992 team could bring in Robinson at center, move Barkley to power forward, Drexler to small forward with Jordan and Stockton/Magic at the guard spots. Or the 1992 team could put Pippen at point guard in a lineup with Drexler, Jordan, Robinson and Barkley. That team could run the break, even with Barkley in the lineup. Rebounding could be an issue for this 1992 squad since Barkley was undersized, depending on the power forward the 2012 team goes with (Griffin...but then who plays center in the up-tempo game for the 2012 team? Maybe Bosh/Aldridge or LeBron moves to power forward), but I would feel good if I were the 1992 team in an up-tempo contest.

So my basic point is the 1992 would be comfortable at center with an up-tempo game because Robinson had no issue playing center at an up-tempo pace.

Jordan on Kobe. Pippen on LeBron. Who guards KD, Rose, Westbrook?

Again, Rose's knee is blown out. So I wouldn't include him on this team. Jordan on Kobe and Pippen on LeBron? How about this? Kobe in 2012 doesn't need Michael Jordan on him. Drexler could probably guard a 34 year old Kobe, Pippen would be on Westbrook, then Jordan guards LeBron. Or Pippen could be on Durant and Jordan guards LeBron. Or you could switch those two. I'm guessing Stockton or Magic (who was not healthy during the 1992 Olympics, but played anyway) would guard Westbrook if Jordan did stay on Kobe and Pippen on LeBron. It's a tough matchup, but I think the 1992 team would figure out a way to make it work. Clearly the 2012 team would be younger and faster. My point is the 1992 has more options than are presented by Palmer.

On the other side of the ball, if we are assuming a Westbrook, Kobe, LeBron, Durant, Howard lineup versus a Magic, Jordan, Pippen, Malone, Robinson lineup, who is guarding in-his-absolute-prime Michael Jordan? 34 year old Kobe Bryant? He's a good defender, but he isn't that good anymore defensively. Let's say LeBron guards Michael Jordan, which I would pay a lot to see happen. Get the hologram people to work on this immediately. So LeBron is on Jordan, Kobe is guarding Pippen, and Durant is guarding Malone? I know Durant has length, but I can't think this matchup is to the advantage of the 2012 team. Magic would have a half a foot in height over Westbrook at the point position as well.

Concerning the play down in the post, the 1992 team would get Howard in the pick-and-roll with Malone/Robinson and cause him problems. Howard is a great defender, but Robinson or Ewing could drag Howard away from the basket. I love Durant, but I'm not convinced he can guard Karl Malone. In that case is LeBron guarding Karl Malone? If the 2012 team takes LeBron off Pippen/Jordan to guard Malone and that leaves Pippen/Bird/Mullin with Durant on them. Perhaps Durant could handle that assignment better than he could handle Malone. My point is I think there are mismatches on both sides of the court, which is what would make this a tough game.

Dream Team can't guard speed. And there's no Easter Bunny. Sorry you're finding out like this.

Just from looking at the 1992 Dream Team roster, it does seem like they would struggle to guard the speed of the 2012 Olympic team. It's difficult to simply say, "Dream Team can't guard speed," since these two teams are never going to play each other. The 1992 Dream Team can't guard speed, but basketball isn't simply a foot race. If basketball was a foot race the Golden State Warriors would make the playoffs every year. The 1992 Dream Team can't guard speed, but how would the 2012 Olympic team guard the 1992 team from the perimeter? I've completely neglected this part of the discussion so far. With Jordan in his absolute prime, Drexler still playing at a high level and Barkley winning an MVP one year later, those three guys are going to be in the lane, so who is going to match up the perimeter shooters the 1992 team would have. Guys like Chris Mullin, Larry Bird, and Stockton. The Dream Team was really good from the perimeter and I want to reiterate I think Chris Palmer is underestimating Clyde Drexler's defense. I don't know if I would consider Drexler to be a sub-par defender.

The advancements in skill and athleticism can't be ignored. Too much for '92 to overcome.

While I again get what Chris Palmer is saying, these "advancements" in skill and athleticism are not being ignored. Basketball players today are physical specimen compared to players 20 years ago. I guess if Palmer is looking at it from a physical standpoint, the 1992 team would be overmatched. As I said before though, several of these 1992 Dream Team members were physically overmatched when they played in the NBA and it didn't affect their performance. I think Chris Palmer is looking at this from a purely perimeter-oriented standpoint, which I think he has to throw how Howard/Aldridge/Griffin/Bosh would hold up against Ewing/Robinson/Barkley/Malone into the discussion as well.

OK, KG and Timmy, you can play too. Need you to guard the ringless Barkley and Malone.

The fact these guys are ringless is incredibly irrelevant. Both of these guys had to get past the Chicago Bulls, Phil Jackson, Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen to get a title. Those 90's Bulls teams were really, really tough to beat. Not very many teams in the 90's were able to beat them in the playoffs. So the "ringless" portion is a cheap shot, especially since only three of the players on the 2012 team have NBA Titles. I left Garnett off the 2012 team because I would take Bosh/Aldridge/Griffin over him in this competition (and I'm not sure Garnett would play either) and Tim Duncan has stated he won't play in the Olympics anymore. He wasn't even a member of the 2008 Olympic men's basketball team. So Duncan wouldn't play most likely and Garnett wouldn't make my team. The fact Barkley and Malone were ringless is just so incredibly irrelevant when it comes to a fictional head-to-head competition like this.

Not disparaging the Dream Team. They changed basketball by globalizing the game. But they would lose today.

It's fun to talk about, but almost impossible to say for sure. It's a tough call and I can't say for sure which team would win this game. Gun to my head, I would possibly go with the 1992 Dream Team over the 2012 Olympic team, but I can see how the 2012 team would win. I think there is one thing we can all agree on...who the hell is Chris Palmer and when did he "bust up" Randolph Childress like he claims he did,

@CoryAlexanderVA Hey Cory, I used to bust up Randolph Childress. I know he put big numbers on you.

and where did Palmer play college ball? I've tried to find information on Palmer and can't seem to find anything. He does seem to have some sort of infatuation with Randolph Childress. Maybe it is payback for Childress dunking on him...

https://twitter.com/ESPNChrisPalmer/status/101648357277171712

Either way, it seems Chris Palmer wanted some attention and he got it. This is a tough argument that can't ever be proven one way or another. Lost amid the claims the 2012 Olympic team is more athletic and faster, I think sight is being lost that the 1992 team contained 11 Hall of Fame players, only two of which were older than 30 years old. So it isn't like they were an excessively old team and they had the best player in NBA history in his prime and were incredibly well balanced from the perimeter and in the paint.

So while I see some matchup difficulties for the 1992 team in guarding LeBron/Wade/Kobe, I also see some matchup difficulties for the 2012 team in guarding Malone/Jordan/Bird/Mullin on offense. As much as Chris Palmer seems to believe this isn't true, the 1992 Dream Team probably would have kept up with the 2012 team to the point I think they could beat them.

I know it goes against the state of the sports media today, but there is no right or wrong on this question. Which team do you think wins if these two teams play? Am I being unrealistic in my expectations for the 1992 Dream Team or is Chris Palmer not only a Grade-A troll, but also overstating the 2012 Olympic team's hypothetical dominance?

15 comments Three Articles In One for Today

I didn't have one certain article I felt like covering today, but I do have a few articles I've bookmarked that don't deserve a full post. I will on occasion stumble upon an article and bookmark it with full intentions of writing about it, then realizing it is not worthy of a long post. I thought I would cover three of these today.

-I'll start off with Frank Deford and his dislike for sporting events that end in ties. The saddest thing for me in reading an article by Frank Deford is that he used to be a great sportswriter. In fact, I read an excerpt of his latest book in Sports Illustrated recently. The excerpt was about his covering the NBA when it was just in its infancy and about his relationships with the players. It was really nice to read. It was readable, interesting and it made me want to buy his book. Then I turn my attention to his writing for CNNSI.com and NPR.com and it is hard to think the same guy wrote the excerpt also writes on those sites. On CNNSI.com and NPR.com Deford takes on some of the most bizarre topics. He takes on how the salary cap ruins baseball, he wants to get rid of field goals, he believes trick plays are child abuse, he pines for the day of "character coaches," and attributes the decline of NASCAR to how people won't fix their own car anymore. Some of those are really painful to read.

I don't like ties in sporting events either, but I won't dedicate an entire column to my dislike for sporting events that end in ties. It just doesn't seem worthy of 200 words, yet that's what Frank Deford does. Don't worry, there is one reference to gunslinging and John Wayne.

Politicians love to boast about American exceptionalism: how special we are from all the merely ordinary, everyday, run-of-the-mill countries around the globe. However, I would say that what sets us apart, more all the time, is that we Americans don't like ties.

Americans love winning. A tie isn't really winning. It is nobody winning. No one likes ties. This would have made a great Tweet and not an article.

Lots of times, in other English-speaking countries, a tie is called a draw. Well, in these United States, when we say "draw," we don't mean a namby-pamby even-steven -- we mean John Wayne a-reachin' for his six-shooter. Now that's the American way to draw, a-standin' our ground.

Yes, we Americans love John Wayne (do we still love him?), guns, and using the letter "a" in front of a word ending in "-ing" with the "g" of "-ing" being replaced with an apostrophe. That's all we love a-doin'. For sho'.

Some Americans when they hear the word "draw" they also think of drawing a picture, but I am sure the picture being drawn is of a six-shooter and people a-shootin' guns at each other.

Ice hockey was tie city. I blame that on the Canadians, who are so nice. But now, in hockey, we got shootouts. That's the all-American way.

Actually shootouts are the "all-stupid" way. The word Frank Deford was a-lookin' for was "all-stupid" because shootouts suck and hockey games should end with another sudden death overtime and not a shootout. Maybe the point of this article would have been better made with two Tweets.

Do you know they have ties in Japanese baseball? That just flat-out takes the "national" out of "pastime."

Taking the "national" out of pastime when discussing Japanese baseball makes sense because baseball is the American pastime, not the Japanese pastime. So when discussing Japanese baseball played in Japan it would theoretically not be referred to as the "national pastime" anyway.

But of course, the rest of the world loves soccer. And it is reliably calculated that 30 percent of all soccer games end tied, drawed, deadlocked, nil-nil. How does the rest of the unexceptional world tolerate this? It's exactly this kind of thinking, I believe, which is why they can't fix the bloody euro.

I'm not sure Frank Deford is going for total accuracy (of course I'm not entirely sure what he is going for with this column...maybe irony?), but soccer is hugely popular in England and they do not use the Euro.

A tie has no place in sports.

Said Roger Goodell to Mike Nolan.

(Hopes someone gets this obscure NFL-related clothing reference)

It's like not finding out who is the "who" in whodunit.

Agreed. No one likes ties. Was this really worth writing about for 200 words though? This isn't worthy of the Frank Deford material I have read in print.

-David Whitley of The Sporting News seems to enjoy the NBA playoffs, but he knows what everyone really wants and he hopes we get it. You may think you want a Thunder-Heat NBA Final matchup or a Spurs-Heat NBA Final matchup, but you really want a Lakers-Celtics NBA Final. He can read our mind,. so that is how he knows this. In fact, he says we should PRAY that we get a Lakers-Celtics NBA Final matchup. Why you ask? Well, David is glad you asked.

If you want the best NBA Finals, your instincts should mimic Pierce’s. Drop to one knee and pray for Boston-LA.

Because nothing excites me more than seeing a Boston Celtics team that struggles putting up 85 points against a good defense go against a Lakers team that is clearly not playing at its peak either.

Romantic fools, maybe. You can even call us old farts for wanting to see Lakers-Celtics instead of Miami-Oklahoma City.

Who is "we?" Do you have a squirrel in your pocket or something? David Whitley uses "we" throughout this column as if he is using the plural form in the desperate hopes of fooling us into believing many, many people agree with him.

We have seen Lakers-Celtics play some really good series in the past, but I'm not sure these Lakers and Celtics team could provide us with any exciting games that would be enjoyed outside of Boston and Los Angeles. Sure, ESPN/ABC would hype the shit out of the series, but that doesn't make it a good series to watch. Quite the opposite in fact. If the series has to get hyped to increase interest, it may lack the substance to be a good series.

The Heat-Thunder is the trendy Finals pick, and it certainly has appeal.

Being that the Thunder are rolling right now and the Heat have two of the five best players in the NBA, I can see how this series would have a lot of appeal. In fact, this Heat-Thunder series would have three of the five best players in the NBA right now. It's not hard to get excited for this series. Even as a Celtics fan, I would have to work a bit to get excited to see the Lakers and Celtics play in the Finals.

For one thing, if LeBron James wins a title, we’d have nothing left to make fun of him with.

And apparently we (there goes that word again) want to make fun of him some more?

But the main reason we can wait for a Heat-Thunder Finals is we’re likely to get five of them in the next six years.

Wow. I didn't even know that. I wasn't aware we were going to get five Heat-Thunder Finals in the next six years. Why is this likely again? Because David Whitley claims it to be so?

Another thought...the Lakers and the Celtics became a great NBA Finals matchup in David Whitley's mind based on the matchups between these two teams in the NBA Finals from the past, right? Celtics-Lakers got their Finals history from having played each other in the Finals many times. So couldn't Thunder-Heat become the kind of dream matchup for the 2010's that Celtics-Lakers was in the 1980's? Especially if David Whitley believes these two teams could meet five times over the next six years. This series could be the next Celtics-Lakers Finals rivalry. Doesn't this sound exciting? I personally think so. So why cheer against it? A great NBA Finals rivalry has to start somewhere.

After this year, we’re not likely to see Boston-LA in Jack Nicholson’s lifetime. It’s an upset we’re even seeing them now considering the past few months.

Don't be a drama queen. The Celtics have a ton of cap room after this season and the Lakers are still the Lakers. Both teams can find a way to put quality teams on the floor after this season.

A couple of hours later at the Staples Center, Bryant’s scoring instincts produced 38 points and a 104-100 win over Denver. Since Kobe arrived in 1997, the Lakers have never lost a series they led 2-0.

They did come close to losing the Denver series after David Whitley wrote this column.

It would be like the Grateful Dead getting back together for a final concert.

Considering Jerry Garcia is dead, no thank you.

If you didn’t like the Grateful Dead, substitute Beatles or Led Zeppelin or Elvis and TCB Band.

Two of the Beatles are dead and Elvis got fat even in the 1970's. Not sure I'm interested.

These examples of bands David Whitley wants to see reunite only goes to help prove my ponit. What he fails to see is that things change. The 2012 Beatles aren't the 1968 Beatles. The 2012 Lakers are not the 2008 Lakers. The 2012 Celtics are not the 1987 Celtics. Simply because the Beatles are up on stage doesn't mean it would be a vintage 1966 performance. Things are different now. A Lakers-Celtics series (besides annoying 50% of NBA fans) wouldn't be a replay of even the 1987 NBA Finals. Circumstances have changed and nostalgia can't necessarily guarantee an exciting series.

The NBA Finals came of age when Magic threw down his baby sky hook and Kevin McHale threw down Kurt Rambis. To players like Durant, Russell and Chamberlain might as well be Lewis and Clark.

None of these players would be playing in the 2012 NBA Finals. How about Avery Bradley guarding Ramon Sessions? How about Steve Blake bouncing off the bench and taking on Keyon Dooling? Who can wait to see Devin Ebanks and Mickael Pietrus going head-to-head?

I realize none of the aforementioned gentlemen would be playing in this year’s Finals.

Do you realize this? I'm not sure David Whitley does realize this. He seems to pine for a series and epic matchup that may not exist anymore.

But it’d be nice to see the two greatest franchises in NBA history clash one more time.

And they will play again. Just hopefully not this year.

“Too old for this,” Pierce tweeted after Tuesday’s game. “I need a bed right now!!”

I can hardly contain the excitement running through my veins at the idea of an NBA Finals matchup where the winner is whichever team gets to 80 points first and both teams' best players are slightly banged up.

Just one more time, wouldn’t you like to see Nicholson’s sideline smirk and hear “Beat LA!”

“Beat Oklahoma City!” just doesn’t have the same ring to it.

How about "Beat the Heat?" That sounds pretty good, no?

-A guy who writes for Bleacher Report says he knows the real reason the Kentucky-Indiana rivalry ended. Spoiler alert: The author says the rivalry ended because Kentucky is afraid of playing the same Indiana Hoosiers program that has two Final Four appearances since 1987. In a completely-and-utterly-related development, the author is a Indiana Hoosiers fan. Apparently making one Sweet 16 has given Hoosiers fans such confidence they now believe other teams, even those who have made two straight Final Fours and just won the national title, will be running scared from them. This is why Hoosiers fans can't have nice things.

The series is over due to Kentucky wanting a neutral court matchup every year in Indianapolis and Louisville.

The horror! A neutral court matchup! Has any other college basketball program ever been so bold as to ask for this? Why would the Kentucky-Indiana games be played on a neutral court? There's no historical precedence for this...other than the fact the Kentucky-Indiana series was played on a neutral court from 1991-2005. Nevermind there is a history of the series being played on a neutral court, playing on a neutral court in 2012 would ruin the series forever.

Last year’s game on December 10 in Bloomington wasn’t just one of the best games in this historic series, but it was one of the best college basketball games of all-time.

It was probably the greatest game in the history of basketball games. The greatest game in the history of sports. The author's opinion is in no way affected by the fact the Hoosiers won this game on a last second field goal and he is a Hoosiers fan.

That atmosphere was special.

And here I heard global warming, chlorofluorocarbons and ultraviolet rays were killing the atmosphere. Turns out this isn't true. John Calipari is the one killing the special atmosphere.

Think how pumped the students and fans that cheer on the Big Blue would have been to have Indiana coming to town with arguably the No. 1 team at that point.

(The English language and the God of Sentence Structure begins weeping violently)

You ever get the feeling Indiana Hoosiers fans are going to ride this projected preseason #1 thing hard? I am pretty sure this is all college basketball fans will hear about. Indiana is the preseason #1 team! That means they win the National Championship automatically, right?

You wouldn’t have that atmosphere if it were played in Louisville.

It would still be a ruckus environment, just a more evenly dispersed environment with fans of both teams being loud.

Coach Calipari has other motives, and I think he’s scared of what Indiana has become with everyone coming back to the team and the recruiting classes the Hoosiers have coming in.

Kentucky is coming off a national title and I'm pretty sure they aren't scared of Indiana's recruiting class since Kentucky's class is considered better than Indiana's class in every single class ranking by every single ranking system I looked up.

Maxpreps

Rivals

ESPN

Scout.com

But no, I'm sure Kentucky and John Calipari are scared of the recruiting class Indiana has which is universally considered to be inferior to Kentucky's recruiting class.

It’s hard for one-and-done’s to gel and beat a better all around “team” that early in the season.

Even though the one-and-done's Kentucky had for 2011-2012 only lost one time before March of this year...to Indiana. They'll never gel in time. Of course the author was just trumping how Kentucky is scared of Indiana's recruiting class. I'm guessing he believes these freshmen don't need time to gel because they aren't going to be one-and-done, but Kentucky's freshmen do need time to gel because they are one-and-done players? This makes not of sense. Not to mention, Kentucky isn't going to be a team made completely of one-and-done players next year. Jarrod Polson, Jon Hood, and Ryan Harrow should play a big role on the team too. Yes, they will be mostly freshmen led, but that doesn't mean Kentucky won't be much of a "team."

The one-and-dones don’t have the time to get used to playing with each other in that type of atmosphere and will lose 90 percent of the time.

Yes, they will lose 90% of the time. It's science. It's science based on the author talking out of his ass. Apparently the author doesn't realize college basketball teams practice and the Kentucky players will probably be used to playing with each other in December. In fact, last year's one-and-done Kentucky team beat an experienced (they started the exact same starting lineup as the year before) UNC team in December 2011. Of course, don't let actual proof this 90% number is bullshit change your mind, let's just stick with the number since it is so scientific. Not to mention, the UK-Indiana game would be in Kentucky, so the crowd would be on Kentucky's side.

Calipari isn’t dumb and knows that. He doesn’t want to lose and knows in this series he will be a loser way more than a winner with the type of players he recruits.

The type of player Calipari recruits being talented, NBA-ready, and able to win the National Title?

Kentucky had way better players as six of them are off to the NBA.

I need a comma and a complete sentence transplant now! STAT!

(The God of Sentence Structure strikes down Bleacher Report in a fit of rage)

They were too young and inexperienced to win in Bloomington in that atmosphere last season.

So naturally this means a team full of completely different Kentucky players will also fail to win in a tough atmosphere. Every single basketball team is the exact same every single year. Let's call a spade a spade. Indiana won on a last second buzzer beater. Let's take down the bragging and rhetoric about how young Kentucky was down a notch or two. It isn't like Indiana handed Kentucky their ass on a silver platter. Indiana played a great game at home and won at the last second. Kentucky later beat Indiana in the 2012 NCAA Tournament on a neutral court.

Once both teams met again in Atlanta in the Sweet 16, Kentucky’s team had more time to gel and look at the result.

I'm guessing our author, who is clearly a crack college basketball analyst, believes the Indiana team did not need time to gel to incorporate Cody Zeller into the offense last year, while the Kentucky team did need time to gel to incorporate each freshmen into the offense. Kentucky just didn't have time to gel. This clearly explains why Kentucky never lost before or after the December loss to Indiana until the SEC Championship Game and beat the #1 team in the nation (UNC) and an eventual Final Four team (Louisville) during that time.

Calipari is afraid of losing to Indiana over and over again and with the game coming so early in the season, he won’t play them and that’s why this series is over.

Nail, meet the hammer that will hit you on the head. John Calipari is scared of playing Indiana. This is why he scheduled a game to be played in Indiana this year and scheduled a home-and-home series with UNC over the past two seasons. John Calipari is very, very scared. That's why he didn't want to play Indiana in Kentucky, but wanted to play on a neutral floor. He didn't want to lose to Indiana again and fear his team receiving motivation from a loss, much like the 2011-2012 team received, which eventually led to a national title. John Calipari hates national titles.

Coach Calipari has put an black eye on every program he’s coached at with asterisks next their respective seasons,

Well, I knew a comment like that would be coming at some point. A fan of the Indiana Hoosiers program run by such a completely and utterly clean coach and with no recent history of NCAA violations definitely has room to talk on this issue.

and now he’s put a black eye on this rivalry and provided a big loss to college basketball.

Thanks a lot Coach Calipari. Now there are only 122 other NCAA college basketball games I am looking forward to next year.

This rivalry has been around for years and one guy just single-handedly ended it.

I know. It's not like this rivalry has a history of playing on a neutral floor. How dare Calipari want the UK-Indiana rivalry to be played on a neutral court...except from 1991-2005 when the UK-Indiana games were played on a neutral floor. I'm guessing the author thought the rivalry was ruined then as well.

7 comments Scoop Jackson Fact Checks Michael Jordan And I Fact Check Scoop Jackson

I know nobody is tired of hearing about LeBron James and his hugely important decision to join the Miami Heat over the next five years. Even though I know no one is tired of this story, I am not planning on focusing on James in this post anyway. I want to focus on the poor argument that Scoop Jackson makes. Scoop Jackson believes Michael Jordan would have done the same thing LeBron James did if he was given the opportunity. Scoop believes this despite the fact Magic Johnson, Charles Barkley and Jordan have all said publicly they would not have joined forces together and play on the same NBA team.

I personally think Barkley would have done this, since he essentially did with the Rockets when he joined Hakeem Olajuwon and Scottie Pippen in Houston. Though all of them were past their prime at that point, I think Barkley would have joined up with other great basketball players to win a title based on him doing this later in his career when he played for the Rockets. Magic Johnson never needed to team up with any other Hall of Fame players because he already played with a few on the Lakers team. He really had no need to go find quality teammates because he always had quality teammates on his team. So that leaves Michael Jordan. I don't think he would have teamed up with other players to win a title because of his competitive spirit and how we wanted to be "the man" on a team. Scoop Jackson disagrees.

Before any more of us jump on the Michael Jordan bandwagon and use his statement about the new-look Miami Heat as a knock against LeBron James for the next decade or so -- before the LeBron-will-never-be-Michael conversations continue -- there are a couple of variables that need to be addressed.

There aren't even a couple of variables that Scoop wants to address here. There is only one major variable. So Scoop's entire point is based on the fact that Michael Jordan had few friends in the NBA so he wouldn't have a chance to team up with other players...and that's why he never would pull a "LeBron" and team up with other great players. Scoop's entire argument is based on assuming Jordan had few friends in the NBA and then assuming he would have joined forced with these friends if he had any.

Fact is, for Jordan to have been in the position -- this is with hindsight, mind you -- to make a move with Larry Bird and Magic Johnson like James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh just did, he would have had to be tight friends with Bird and Magic from the minute they all entered the league. If not before.

This is incorrect. Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh and LeBron James weren't tight friends before they came into the NBA. They became tight friends after being drafted in 2003 and playing together on the USA Basketball team. So Jordan wouldn't have had to be friends with Bird and Johnson before he came into the league to meet the standard Scoop is holding him to in order to have friends in the NBA.

Also, Magic and Bird were older than Jordan so it isn't even a fair comparison to say Jordan would have teamed up with them. Jordan was the new superstar in the NBA after Bird and Magic had competed for NBA titles against each other. So I think in the example given where Jordan mentioned he would not have teamed up with Bird and Magic, it isn't a comparable example to what Wade, Bosh, and James did.

I don't think Jordan would have teamed up with Bird or Magic because they were further apart in age, so Scoop has the wrong players to match up with Jordan in the very beginning if he wants a fair comparison. I think a comparable example would be if Jordan teamed up with Charles Barkley and Hakeem Olajuwon, but this isn't even a good comparison because neither Barkley nor Olajuwon had a similar skill set to Jordan. Both Wade and James have a similar skill set in that they can handle the ball as a taller point guard and like to drive to the basket to score.

So my final answer is that this would be like if Clyde Drexler, Barkley, and Jordan teamed up together. Using any of these examples, I just don't see Jordan teaming up with these guys to win a championship, whether they were friends or not.

The deal with James, Bosh and Wade is as rooted in friendship as the arrangement Kevin McHale and Danny Ainge made that sent Kevin Garnett to Boston. McHale and Ainge were teammates for nine years in Boston and won three rings together. They maintained a friendly relationship as general managers of different franchises in their post-playing careers.

Those three players may have been friends, but that isn't the point. The point is that simply because Michael Jordan didn't have close friends in the NBA (which is a lie because he did have close friends) doesn't mean he would have teamed up with these friends if given the opportunity.

Actually, since Wade, Bosh, and James are all friends I would prefer they be on the same team because I would rather they be on the same team trying to get their team to the playoffs rather than fucking laughing it up on the court together while competing against each other in the playoffs. I am one of those people who doesn't like to see the superstars being great friends on the court in the playoffs.

Michael Jordan had friends in the NBA, like Charles Barkley, and he didn't team up with him to win a title.

C'mon, son.

Be real, yo.

To ignore the friendship facet of the Heat situation is disingenuous.

To ignore the fact Michael Jordan did have friends in the NBA is disingenuous when just assuming that false premise is the reason why Jordan never teamed up with each other.

And to not consider it in making the comparative analysis Jordan did is unfair to Wade, Bosh and James.

Michael Jordan didn't make a comparative analysis, he just said he would not have teamed up with other great players on the same team like LeBron James did. As I have said, I have no problem with what LeBron did, I just don't think it was the right move. Few players want to end up like Kevin Garnett and get stuck on a team with absolutely no help for most of ten years. It is even stupid to try and compare the situation Michael Jordan was in during his playing career with the situation that LeBron James was in this summer. Jordan just said he wouldn't have done what James did, and since Jordan never did what James did and his massive go wouldn't have let him share the spotlight, we have to assume it is the truth.

Especially James, the one at the center of it all.

If anything, I want to make sure we are fair to LeBron James. I am sure he really cares if we are being fair to him.

What is really unfair are any comparisons of James to Jordan. James is a much more willing passer than Jordan was at this stage in his career. Jordan had to learn to play with his teammates while James is great at playing with his teammates, he just needed better teammates. The whole Jordan-James comparison probably shouldn't even be made and I am sure I have made it at some point as well. LeBron James and Michael Jordan are completely different players and that is why LeBron would even think of joining forces with two other great NBA players. For me, Wade is more like Jordan than James is like Jordan.

Magic, Bird and Jordan, although they liked and respected one another, did not get down like that in their playing days. They weren't friends. Weren't fam. And because of that, it's almost impossible to take what Jordan is saying as an admissible assessment.

It hurts my feelings to defend Michael Jordan. It goes against everything I like or want to do. He went to UNC-CH, played for the Bulls, and was an asshole to my fiance one time at a golf course because she tried to give him Powerade. I don't like the guy.

It is easy to take what Jordan is saying as an admissible assessment because he never did join another team with two other great players like James did. Isiah Thomas and Magic Johnson were friends and they never played together.

I am sure some people would say the entire problem with the NBA is that Wade, Bosh, and James are friends and "fam." The buddy-buddy routine seems to take away a bit from the competition between two teams. That's how some people see it and those who don't like James' move to Miami also probably believe the NBA is a better league when the players aren't friends or "fam" with each other.

It's definitely hard to accept it as something we can hold against LeBron for leaving Cleveland to go to Miami.

Not really. Jordan played in the "golden age" of the NBA when the superstars where fairly well separated on different teams and when superstars team up this dilutes the NBA because you don't have the separation of superstars on different teams. When Jordan played in the Eastern Conference there was Jordan on the Bulls, Bird on the Celtics, Dominique Wilkins on the Hawks, Isiah Thomas on the Pistons, Patrick Ewing on the Knicks, Reggie Miller on the Pacers...etc.

When superstars team up, this separation goes away. So those who think the team of Wade, Bosh, and James isn't good for the Eastern Conference or the NBA may have a point. Separating superstars like this could possibly dilute the Eastern Conference.

A more accurate and applicable analogy might have been possible if Jordan had set up a scenario in which he'd played for Charlotte -- near his hometown, the same way Cleveland is near LeBron's Akron -- for the first seven years of his career, during which he'd won no rings and didn't have Scottie Pippen as a teammate or Phil Jackson as a coach. And if he'd imagined further that his contract was up at the same time that, say, Patrick Ewing and Charles Barkley were becoming free agents and Ewing -- already with the Knicks -- pitched the concept of those three friends playing together in New York … if Jordan had set it up that way and still said he would have turned down the opportunity so he could prove he was "the Man," then his comments might be easier to accept and appreciate.

I hate this bullshit point of view. This is the same thing as people who always justify their actions because "you don't know how it feels to be in my shoes." Scoop wants us to believe that because Michael Jordan didn't face THE EXACT SAME SITUATION as LeBron James, he isn't in a position to judge what James did. I say this is bullshit. Jordan doesn't have to be in the exact same position as LeBron to have his comments easier to accept and appreciate. The fact Jordan won 6 NBA titles while being "the man" and sticking it out on a Bulls team that for a while in the late 1980's seemed to be going nowhere is evidence of what he would have done.

Also, we can't just assume that Phil Jackson and Scottie Pippen never played or coached for the Bulls because they did. The fact is that Michael Jordan didn't attempt to get "his coach" for the Bulls nor did he make it clear he needed to see changes in the team or he would jump ship. So the fact the Bulls got the right players around Jordan, eventually, is evidence that perhaps LeBron should have stuck it out longer. That's what Jordan was trying to say.

His reality right now is that he's the majority owner of the Bobcats. So more important than him saying that he'd never have orchestrated an MJ-Bird-Magic collaboration as a player is whether he'd resist a James-Wade-Bosh-like alliance as an owner.

These are two completely and utterly different things. Choosing to go with two other great players to a different team as a player is COMPLETELY different from being an owner and choosing to sign three great players. Simply because as a player Jordan didn't think forming an alliance with two other players was a good idea, doesn't mean as an owner he wouldn't think it may be smart to sign three players who want to form an alliance together.

If we take Michael at his word about wanting "to beat those guys," then he should have the same mentality as an owner as he did as a player. Shouldn't he?

No. Absolutely not. Because Jordan would want to sign these players as a player doesn't mean he would have been a part of a team that had two other great players. Owners or GMs who are ex-players don't necessarily build a team based on how they liked to play the game of basketball. In fact, it would be stupid to do this.

As a player, Jordan wanted to compete against the other superstar players in the NBA, but as an owner if three superstars want to be on his team then it isn't hypocritical to sign all three players. He couldn't assume every player has the same type of competitive drive or preferences for teammates that he had as a player.

So to follow this logic through from his comments about what he wouldn't do, Jordan would rather try to win a championship with Gerald Wallace and Stephen Jackson on his roster than sign three of the league's 10 best players for his squad.

Jordan said he wouldn't have met up with two other superstars as a PLAYER. This has nothing to do with him doing this as an owner. He runs his team differently from how he played basketball himself.

The Heat did not sign three of the league's 10 best players. Chris Bosh isn't one of the best 10 players in the NBA. He is the second best player on a good team. There are easily 10 better players to be found in the NBA. Bosh has been the best player on a shitty team. He's not even a superstar.

And if one of Jordan's "superstar" players suggested that scenario to him -- as Wade did to the ownership of the Heat -- he'd turn it down!

Absolutely not true. Scoop Jackson is making a terrible comparison. Michael Jordan as an owner and Michael Jordan as a player are two completely different things.

It's hard to believe that he'd stay true to what he said he'd never have done as a player if the same opportunity fell into his owner's lap the way the James-Wade-Bosh deal did for Micky Arison in Miami.

That's entire point that Scoop Jackson seems to miss. Michael Jordan wouldn't pass up the opportunity as an owner to add James, Bosh, and Wade. As a player, Jordan did not and claims he would not have tried to get two other superstars together with him on the same team. I don't get why Scoop Jackson can't get that Michael Jordan as a player had different motivations from Michael Jordan as an owner.

And that is what, deep down, makes it hard to believe that even Jordan believes it.

Simply put, this is why it would be wrong to take his comments and apply them directly to the situation at hand, why it would be wrong to suggest that Jordan believes the Miami situation is an admission of surrender by LeBron, implying that LBJ is really not a "king" because kings don't join forces with other kings, or that there is room for only one "king" per team.

Scoop Jackson is an idiot. Why the hell would Michael Jordan as an owner give a shit if LeBron wants to join the Bobcats and potentially undermine his role as the "king" of a team? Jordan doesn't care as an owner what James does, but as a player Jordan thinks that LeBron is passing up a chance to be considered in the upper echelon of NBA players.

I know the idea of a person having two different points of view on a situation depending on his role in the situation is WAY over Scoop's head, but this isn't a hard concept. Jordan was making a quote as an ex-player who assumes that LeBron James wants to win a title as the best player on a team because Jordan wanted to win a title as the best player on a team. Knowing this, you can appreciate Jordan's quote as his actual opinion.

Jordan is saying, as a superstar player, he wouldn't have joined forces with any other players. As an owner, I am assuming he doesn't care if other players want to do this, he will be willing to sign all three players. Jordan isn't saying teaming up with Wade and Bosh is a bad idea, he is saying that he (Jordan) would not have done this as a superstar player. That's all. This opinion in no way reflects on whether he would want these players on his team as an owner.

Outside of the many verifiable truths that are being overlooked here (such as, fundamentally there is no difference between this and the assembling of the original Dream Team),

The Dream Team was a team put together for exhibition games, specifically the Olympics. The Dream Team was together for a limited time and if the United States could allow pros to play basketball in the Summer Olympics, then inherently within this idea is the realization the best players in the NBA would have to play together. Michael Jordan didn't seek out to play with the best players in the NBA on the same team. In fact, I bet Jordan wouldn't have minded the Dream Team being him and 11 other college basketball players.

Wade, Bosh, and James are playing professional games and have signed contracts to be together for five years...or 4 years and many months longer than the Dream Team was ever together. Fundamentally there is a difference in "this" and the Dream Team, because "this" was done on a micro-scale of competing against teams in the NBA, while the Dream Team was on a more macro-scale of competing against teams from other countries.

it's hard to believe that Michael Jordan, if given the exact same situation LeBron was in, would have done something differently.

I don't find this hard to believe at all. Michael Jordan wanted to be the absolute best player on his team and he didn't want to share the spotlight with anyone. It was always clear that Pippen was the Robin to Jordan's Batman. Jordan could probably never have long-term co-existed with another superstar player.

And it's virtually inconceivable to believe that he will carry that same mentality and philosophy with him as an owner.

He's too smart for that.

It is inconceivable he carries this mentality and philosophy with him as an owner because he doesn't. He is smart enough to realize what was good for him as a player may not be good for all NBA players.

So when he says "there's no way" he would have done what LeBron just did, it contradicts almost everything we hold dear when we honor Jordan's legacy.

¿Qué demonios significa esto?

I am going to start typing in Spanish because I feel like I am reading a different language anyway, so I may as well show off the Spanish I learned (threw into a English-Spanish translator online) in 10th-12th grade.

Because the way I see it, LeBron's decision -- right or wrong, agree or disagree -- was about basketball. It was about trying to win championships, not win hearts. It was about an opportunity to make history, not prove a point.

If there is anything we know about Michael Jordan it is that he wanted to make history WHILE proving a point. He wanted to prove he was the best player in the NBA, he wanted to prove he could beat the Pistons and the Lakers, he wanted to prove he could play baseball while serving his suspension for gambling, he wanted to prove he could come back whenever the hell he wanted and win more NBA titles, and he wanted to prove he could return to the NBA and play into his 40's. He succeeded on most of these attempts to prove a point. Jordan made history while proving the point that he was the best NBA player of all-time.

So this decision really has nothing to do with Jordan's legacy.

To us, Michael Jordan personifies, defines and embodies winning in the context of team sports.

But as the best individual player on those teams. This is a point that Scoop Jackson just can't seem to understand. Michael Jordan won championships in the NBA while being the best player in the NBA and the clear best player on his own team.

No one did it better. But his comments wreak of something different. It's a fragrance called "For The Love Of Self," not "For The Love Of The Game."

Obviously Jordan is very self-involved, but his comments on LeBron reveal the difference in he and LeBron James. It isn't a difference that reflects poorly on either of them. Jordan wanted to win championships on his terms and show that he could win a title as the undisputed best player on a team at all times, while LeBron wants to win championships by any means necessary even if it means he has to reduce his star status or be relegated to a co-headliner. Jordan wasn't willing to reduce his star status and wanted to win on his own terms.

Jordan's comments just reflect the surprise that a person who calls himself "King" James is willing to be a co-headliner and doesn't want to win a championship on his terms as the undisputed best player on a championship team. Scoop Jackson completely misses the point by even trying to compare Jordan's attitude towards superstars playing together on his team as an owner of the Bobcats and Jordan's attitude towards himself playing with fellow superstars as a player.